Journals / Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine / 2026 / Volume: 9 Issue: 6

Artificial Intelligence integration in pediatric practice: pediatricians’ data-sharing boundaries, diagnosis-related use, ethical concerns, diagnostic procedures, and willingness to use secure institutional systems

Hüseyin Ilgın Bal(Ankara Etlik City Hospital)0000-0002-7588-3288
Dilek Dilli(Ankara Etlik City Hospital)0000-0003-2634-2562
Mehmet Tolga Köle(Ankara Etlik City Hospital)0000-0002-6055-7746
Yunus Emre Avcı(Ankara Etlik City Hospital)0000-0003-1391-6598
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-10-25
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results: Overall, 90.1% were willing to use a secure institutional AI system compliant with national data protection requirements, whereas fewer than 15% would enter directly identifying information such as patient names or file numbers.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aims: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in healthcare, but its routine use by pediatricians remains unclear.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: This cross-sectional web-based survey included 302 pediatricians in Turkiye in June-July 2026.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results: Overall, 90.1% were willing to use a secure institutional AI system compliant with national data protection requirements, whereas fewer than 15% would enter directly identifying information such as patient names or file numbers.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2026 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Artificial Intelligence · data protection · data-sharing preferences

Abstract

Aims: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in healthcare, but its routine use by pediatricians remains unclear. This study examined the clinical and academic tasks for which pediatricians use AI, their willingness to use secure institutional systems, and the patient information they would enter. These dimensions were examined together to distinguish general acceptance of AI from task-specific use and willingness to share different types of patient information. Methods: This cross-sectional web-based survey included 302 pediatricians in Turkiye in June-July 2026. A 25-item questionnaire assessed task-specific AI use, ethical and professional concerns, institutional preparedness, willingness to use secure systems, and patient data-sharing preferences. Content validity was evaluated by 10 experts using a modified Lawshe approach. Data were summarized descriptively; Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney U, and Spearman correlation analyses were performed. Demographic and professional analyses were exploratory. Results: Overall, 90.1% were willing to use a secure institutional AI system compliant with national data protection requirements, whereas fewer than 15% would enter directly identifying information such as patient names or file numbers. Clinical use was most common for medical information seeking (61.3%) and least common for preparing patient or family education materials (22.8%); 12.6% reported no clinical use. In academic work, literature searching and summarization was most frequent (68.9%), while project or grant applications were least frequent (7.6%); 11.6% reported no academic use. Older age was weakly associated with lower regular AI use (ρ=-0.192, p<0.001). Conclusion: Pediatricians use AI-supported language models across clinical and academic tasks and are receptive to secure institutional systems. However, willingness to share directly identifying patient data remains limited. Implementation should prioritize data protection, clinician oversight, and practical training.

🔖

Cite This Article

Bal, H. I., Dilli, D., Köle, M. T., Avcı, Y. E. (2026). Artificial Intelligence integration in pediatric practice: pediatricians’ data-sharing boundaries, diagnosis-related use, ethical concerns, diagnostic procedures, and willingness to use secure institutional systems. Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine, Volume: 9 Issue: 6. https://ajindex.com/articles/1668042

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (21)

  1. Kalkan M, Guzel MS, Ekinci F, Akcapinar Sezer E, Asuroglu T. Comparative analysis of deep learning methods on CT images for lung cancer specification. Cancers (Basel). 2024;16(19):3321. doi:10.3390/cancers16193321
  2. Henzler D, Schmidt S, Koçar A, et al. Healthcare professionals’ perspectives on Artificial Intelligence in patient care: a systematic review of hindering and facilitating factors on different levels. BMC Health Serv Res. 2025;25(1):633. doi:10.1186/s12913-025-12664-2
  3. Al-Sofyani KA. Role of Artificial Intelligence in pediatric intensive care: a survey of healthcare staff perspectives in Saudi Arabia. Front Pediatr. 2025;13:1533877. doi:10.3389/fped.2025.1533877
  4. Güzeloğlu E, Ateş B, Aydın Özgür FA, Kök S, Dağ H, Arıca V. Assessing pediatricians’ readiness for Artificial Intelligence: a cross-sectional study in İstanbul, Turkiye. BMC Pediatr. 2026;26(1):835. doi:10.1186/s12887-026-07088-8
  5. Javed S, Pritom MH, Devi R, et al. Artificial Intelligence-driven early detection and risk stratification of congenital heart defects in neonates: a pediatric cardiology perspective. J Med Health Sci Rev. 2025;2(3):4722-4730. doi:10.62019/91hd5z22
  6. Santamaría-Orleans A, Ortiz-González L, Pérez-Hernández M, Coronel-Rodríguez C. Impact of digitalization on pediatric practice and childhood health care in Spain: nationwide survey study. JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2025;8:e75310. doi:10.2196/75310
  7. Razdan P, Das A, Habiba S, Doley S, Tiwari DA, Hazari P. Knowledge, perception and attitude of dentists regarding the role of Artificial Intelligence in the field of pediatric dentistry: an online questionnaire study. Dent Med Probl. 2025;62(4):645-655. doi:10.17219/dmp/183901
  8. Naik SS, Winner J, Ratnaparkhi I, Chavan S, Gorule M, Chaudhary R. Survey on awareness of Artificial Intelligence in pediatric dentistry. Bioinformation. 2025;21(6):1647-1650. doi:10.6026/973206300211647
  9. Alabbad FA, Almeneessier AS, Alshalan MH, Aljarba MN. Knowledge, attitude, and practice of Artificial Intelligence among doctors and medical students in Saudi Arabia. J Family Med Prim Care. 2025;14(4):1459-1464. doi:10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1812_24
  10. Chen Z, Shu J, Wang D, et al. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward Artificial Intelligence in medicine among Chinese physicians: a cross-sectional study from January to March 2024 with analysis of influencing factors. Int J Med Inform. 2026;216:106476. doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2026.106476
  11. Warrington DJ, Holm S. Healthcare ethics and Artificial Intelligence: a UK doctor survey. BMJ Open. 2024;14(12):e089090. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-089090
  12. Alzamel LG, Hassouneh L, Jallad ST. Knowledge, perception, and attitude of healthcare students towards Artificial Intelligence: a multi-center cross sectional study. BMC Med Educ. 2026;26(1):730. doi:10.1186/s12909-026-09053-6
  13. Eabenson S, Gudadinni MR, Yadavannavar MC, Udgiri R, Rangoli AM. Are future doctors ready for AI? Artificial Intelligence in the field of medicine: perception among medical students in North Karnataka: a cross-sectional study. Int J Community Med Public Health. 2026;13(3):1384-1390. doi:10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20260697
  14. Keerthana V, Mukkapati KR, Mundru A, Dasari K, Dulipala P, Kamunuri R. Knowledge and practice of Artificial Intelligence among undergraduate medical students; a cross-sectional study. Eur J Cardiovasc Med. 2025;15(3):364-369. doi:10.5083/ejcm/25-03-67
  15. Perrier E, Rifai M, Terzic A, Dubois C, Cohen JF. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices towards Artificial Intelligence among young pediatricians: a nationwide survey in France. Front Pediatr. 2022;10:1065957. doi:10.3389/fped.2022.1065957
  16. Tyagi M, Ravi R, Rao SS, Kamath N, Soans ST. Knowledge, attitudes and practices toward Artificial Intelligence among pediatricians in India: a cross-sectional web-based nationwide survey. PLoS One. 2025;20(12):e0338314. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0338314
  17. Tozzi AE, Gesualdo F, Pandolfi E, et al. Prioritizing educational initiatives on emerging technologies for Italian pediatricians: bibliometric review and a survey. Ital J Pediatr. 2023;49(1):112. doi:10.1186/s13052-023-01512-w
  18. Wang Y, Fu W, Gu Y, et al. Comparative survey among pediatricians, nurses and health information technicians on ethics implementation knowledge of and attitude towards social experiments based on medical Artificial Intelligence at children’s hospitals in Shanghai: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open. 2023;13(11):e071288. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-071288
  19. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39(2):175-191. doi:10.3758/bf03193146
  20. Lawshe CH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Pers Psychol. 1975;28(4):563-575. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x
  21. Chelli M, Descamps J, Lavoué V, et al. Hallucination rates and reference accuracy of ChatGPT and Bard for systematic reviews: comparative analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2024;26:e53164. doi:10.2196/53164